Chapter 4 Analysis
In chapter four, Kathrine Hayles says that the recursive loops that eliterature creates [Hayles loops are between embodied practice, tacit knowledge, and explicit articulation] gives us the opportunity to explore exactly what makes us human in an era of web based connectivity and the computerization of many, if not all, facets of society. Hayles states, “Human agency operates with complex systems in which nonhuman actors play important roles”. The start of this chapter is Hayles contemplating “coevolution", the ways in which literature affects the way we value and see “computational practice” as that practice also affects and transforms literature.
"Electronic literature extends the traditional functions of print literature in creating recursive feedback loops between explicit articulation, conscious thought and embodied sensorimotor knowledge.
The feedback loops progress in both directions, up from embodied sensorimotor knowledge to explicit articulation, and down from explicit articulation to sensorimotor knowledge. While print literature also operates in this way, electronic literature preforms the additional function of entwining human ways of knowing with machine cognitions" (p. 135).
Hayles reveals her thesis in this chapter as well. Hayles postulates that eliterature, “…extends the traditional functions of print literature in creating recursive feedback loops between explicit articulation, conscious thought, and embodied sensorimotor knowledge…eliterature performs the additional function of entwining human ways of knowing with machine cognitions” (135). So change in any part of the recursive loop results in new understandings (and changing cognitions) within the loop.
Knowledges: an object of conscious thought or bodily knowledge
"These knowledges typically remain unevenly articulated with one another - distributed among different ways of knowing" (p. 138).
"Everyone comes to digital literature with differentials. If we knew everything uniformly, there would be much less to discover" (p. 139)"
Thus, the recursive loops that occurred in literature have an added dimension. Hayles quotes the Zen poet Donald Rumsfeld writing that the purposes of literature, “…are to reveal what we know but don’t know that we know, and to transform what we know we know into what we don’t yet know” (132). Hayles gives many examples of how eliterature plays a role in disrupting our normal reading traditions, creating new traditions, but recognizing that this change is partly due to human use of new technology and, at the same time, that same technology effects the possibilities of use and understanding for humans. The way that this fits with literature is best summed up when Hayles quotes Brian Kim Stefans [writer of Fashionable Noise: On Digital Poetics] writing that every accomplished work of literary art has, “…elements that resist totalizing interpretations…” (155). The computer just adds another layer that further complicates our understanding of human cognition, and adds an interplay between human and machine language and understanding.
[KS: Line above suggests that there is a non-mediated level of human cognition, but Hayles doesn't subscribe to that model.]
Discussion Questions:
Since computers do not have intentions, is our interaction with them via e-literature simply a way to create or attempt to humanize the computer?
Hayles states that a word processor has "greater cognitive abilities and interactive potential" (135). Is a word processor more intense than a pencil? Does technology enhance our cognitive abilities?
Is e-literature changing the manner in which we read, or simply reinforcing deconstructionism or even structuralism?
In chapter four, Kathrine Hayles says that the recursive loops that eliterature creates [Hayles loops are between embodied practice, tacit knowledge, and explicit articulation] gives us the opportunity to explore exactly what makes us human in an era of web based connectivity and the computerization of many, if not all, facets of society. Hayles states, “Human agency operates with complex systems in which nonhuman actors play important roles”. The start of this chapter is Hayles contemplating “coevolution", the ways in which literature affects the way we value and see “computational practice” as that practice also affects and transforms literature.
The feedback loops progress in both directions, up from embodied sensorimotor knowledge to explicit articulation, and down from explicit articulation to sensorimotor knowledge. While print literature also operates in this way, electronic literature preforms the additional function of entwining human ways of knowing with machine cognitions" (p. 135).
Hayles reveals her thesis in this chapter as well. Hayles postulates that eliterature, “…extends the traditional functions of print literature in creating recursive feedback loops between explicit articulation, conscious thought, and embodied sensorimotor knowledge…eliterature performs the additional function of entwining human ways of knowing with machine cognitions” (135). So change in any part of the recursive loop results in new understandings (and changing cognitions) within the loop.
Thus, the recursive loops that occurred in literature have an added dimension. Hayles quotes the Zen poet Donald Rumsfeld writing that the purposes of literature, “…are to reveal what we know but don’t know that we know, and to transform what we know we know into what we don’t yet know” (132). Hayles gives many examples of how eliterature plays a role in disrupting our normal reading traditions, creating new traditions, but recognizing that this change is partly due to human use of new technology and, at the same time, that same technology effects the possibilities of use and understanding for humans. The way that this fits with literature is best summed up when Hayles quotes Brian Kim Stefans [writer of Fashionable Noise: On Digital Poetics] writing that every accomplished work of literary art has, “…elements that resist totalizing interpretations…” (155). The computer just adds another layer that further complicates our understanding of human cognition, and adds an interplay between human and machine language and understanding.
[KS: Line above suggests that there is a non-mediated level of human cognition, but Hayles doesn't subscribe to that model.]
Discussion Questions: